User talk:31dot/Archive2012
For older conversations, see the pre-admin archive, the 2009 archive, the 2010 archive, and the 2011 archive. If you are responding to a post I left on your talk page, please reply there, to keep the discussion in one location.. Xindi incident When you have a moment could you take a look at the Xindi incident reconfirmation? Thing needs at least four more support votes to pass because of it's history. Thanks. - 00:21, January 8, 2012 (UTC) Image policy discussion As you suggested discussing it in more detail, it would be great if you joined Memory Alpha talk:Image use policy#Policy clarification regarding "fanmade" images. Thanks. -- Cid Highwind 12:17, January 13, 2012 (UTC) Regarding your comment "I have no means to compel either of you to do so" - actually, you do. You have admin rights (and responsibilities), so if you think that words are no longer enough, you do have other means to stop either me or Archduk3, or both of us, from editing. Having directly been called an "idiot" now on top of all that other shit that has been hurled my way throughout the last two days, I really ask you to at least consider that possibility. In any case, your activity over there is much appreciated. No one else seems to be interested in moderating that stuff. :) -- Cid Highwind 23:24, January 14, 2012 (UTC) :While I can block someone with admin powers, as I understand it I cannot compel them to respect it- I've accidentally blocked myself and was able to undo it. I haven't seen anything to suggest that anyone would disrespect it- but I wanted to be clear with my thoughts. I truly don't want to get to that point with anyone but I will certainly consider it if necessary for any user. --31dot 23:37, January 14, 2012 (UTC) ::I'll gladly sit the rest of the discussion out if Cid does as well. I don't mind if it's while I am, or he is, blocked or not, and I've already said I'll abide by any blocked placed on me, provided it's explained. There currently is no requirement for more than one admin to intervene right now, so do what you think is best. - 23:46, January 14, 2012 (UTC) :31dot, I see no need to "sit out" that whole discussion as suggested by Archduk3. A distinction needs to be made between the on-topic part consisting of policy suggestions, questions on how a specific suggestion would affect existing material, hopefully the answers to those questions, pointing out misconceptions of others about my suggestions, etc. - and the off-topic part of weird accusations and insults. I will continue the former and will let you or any other admin that wants to handle it decide who's to blame and eventually to be "punished" for the latter. Of course, I would post less frequently if more people than just one and a half others got involved, and if the discussion became more decent and less personal - perhaps the amount of moderation by others needs to be increased. Should you decide that blocking me is a correct way of dealing with things, then I would abide in any case. I would complain later if the block is not properly explained, though. ;) -- Cid Highwind 00:09, January 15, 2012 (UTC) Image uploads MediaWiki:Successfulupload may be the solution to the problem, see w:tardis:MediaWiki:Successfulupload. I don't know if that would work with the licenses "turned off" as they are though. - 00:02, February 2, 2012 (UTC) :Something like that could be helpful, either a new one or resurrecting that one. That one was a bit before my time so I'm not familiar with it. Something to keep in mind, I guess.--31dot 00:41, February 2, 2012 (UTC) Deletion of disputed images Moved to Forum:Deletion of disputed images. Impulse episode and Sulfur issue Just to tell you i have no issue whit him whatsoever, but like i said before i did try to find a solution but to no avail and since you don't want referenced on the Zombie ,(for good reasons), article but you will accept three Zombie references in this article; now you must admit that doesn't make much sense either. And if "Zobie-like" isn't a "personal choice word" then i don't know what is and i'm at a lost.. So i'll just give up the issue and leave the article as it is. Sorry if i seemed to have an issue with Sulfur but my issue was with the article. From now on i'll try and refrain from starting "Talks" and let you Administrators do the change needed to articles who need it.--Captain riggs 15:44, March 20, 2012 (UTC) Now what's wrong really? Hi. I see that you have reverted several of my edits and I fail to see the logic. I usually note down trivia, not unlike those I have been reading all around MA. Each episode has a thorough list of continuity notes, interesting observations and hard to see links or inconsistencies between episodes. So I am enriching them with other details which are not there, and I expect are equally interesting. That's what a wiki is all about. I don't know if there is some "notability" policy which I fail to grasp. My note that Kirk and Spock repeat a similar discussion from another episode doesn't seem more trivial or insignificant than existing notes in this and other articles; such as a line below stating that "This is the only appearance by John Winston in which he has no dialog." I don't know if it's a nitpick or not, but certainly my nitpicks are not unlike what MA is tolerating everywhere Except if me being an unregistered user (which usually means "a random fanboy who just happened to pass by and tends to notice weird things"), unavoidably makes my notes seem to be of different importance from those existing before me. I hope you understand that the impression I gather from you is this: "Trivia adding is considered nitpicking (especially from anon users who have no qualification) so they are summarily removed; but existing trivia are there, because we wrote them and because, well, they have just stayed so far". Another explanation is that MA has tolerated trivia long enough and undergoes a purging period; no more are allowed, until eventually most of the existing ones will be removed too. Another explanation is that I had the bad luck to having been patrolled by an anti-trivialist. Please help me seeing where justice is, because I see none. If MA tolerates "nitpicks" then you should allow users add some too. If it doesn't, then it would be a good idea not just maintaining it, but to make this obvious retroactively. Now allow me to tell you that I am not a random passerby; at least not one of those who just noticed in some episode that Kirk's right sleeve is one mm longer than the left one and decides to write it down. Of course I consider myself an "inclusionist" and I love trivia, which has brought me at odds with people who go by the book, but I have some experience around wikia for several years now and I am as conscious an editor as I could be. Hoping for a compromise, thanks. 02:10, March 23, 2012 (UTC) :I will first say that the fact you are not a registered user is not relevant to what I did. I was only thinking about the article itself; not who made the edit. :Nitpicking is not permitted per the nitpick policy. Your comment about the Eugenics War and WWIII seemed nitpickish to me because it was suggesting an error in the use of the term "World War". The comment about the word irritation seemed nitpickish because it suggests that Spock should have known what it was the second time(and is thus an error). We made a community decision that these kind of comments were not what we were about, unless they can be cited with things like statements from Trek staff or comments from authoritative sources(the TNG Companion, ST Encyclopedia, etc.) I'm certainly open to possible rewordings, but I'm not sure what would be left that is notable without the nitpick aspect. I would suggest that any discussion about this take place on the article's talk page, where I copied your comments to(for that purpose).--31dot 02:20, March 23, 2012 (UTC) :The John Winston statement you mention is not a nitpick, because it is relevant to the production process.--31dot 02:22, March 23, 2012 (UTC) :The nitpick policy came about after much of this site was established, and there might still be some in articles; if you see one, feel free to suggest it for removal. Again, it doesn't have to do with you being an unregistered user.--31dot 02:25, March 23, 2012 (UTC) Thanks for your reply. I did not remember seeing the article on nitpicking policy. As I imagined, it had to do with rules that came forth to remedy things already established, something that tends to happen eventually around the wikis. I understand that being unregistered is not a main factor, but I considered it a possible negative 09:59, March 23, 2012 (UTC) Ian Troi's Accent I don't agree with the assessment of Ian Troi's accent disparity as a "nitpick". I remember there being a reference to the writers adding a line in Haven because Majel Barrett had a completely different accent. I don't know what happened to that information because it's not on the Haven page anymore, but I spent all evening trying to track down the line, which is not in the original script: "It's amazing how that accent of yours reminds me of your father." So when I was watching Dark Page tonight, I remembered that line and thought it was odd how Ian Troi spoke with a regular American accent. At the risk of sounding like I have a bruised ego, I don't appreciate the arbitrary undoing of my efforts. If I've violated the community guidelines, please tell me so. Brian F. Sanford 13:02, April 3, 2012 (UTC) I just read the nitpick policy guidelines and I have to say I don't see how my edits violate the policy... Not nitpicks: Established facts that are later contradicted by what may be a mistake are noteworthy (for example, Data's use of contractions, the number of decks on the USS Enterprise-E, the number of moons around Bajor). ...especially when the bit about Xelo being Mrs. Troi's assistant all the way back when Deanna was a baby and passing on the picture to Homn is complete conjecture and that was allowed to remain. The policy seems inconsistently applied. Brian F. Sanford 13:30, April 3, 2012 (UTC) :It wasn't an "arbitrary undoing" of your edit; my reasoning was given in the edit summary. That is a standard wiki procedure and should not be taken as a personal sleight against you; I've had it done to me many times and will have it done again in the future. :The nitpick policy came about relatively recently in the history of this site, and as such there may be some nits out there that haven't been removed yet. If you see any, feel free to suggest them for removal. 31dot 13:34, April 3, 2012 (UTC) Shawn A. Sequiera Since the Shawn A. Sequiera page was most likely spam, as in written as an ad first and foremost, I deleted it. The only result I could find for him and Star Trek was this Hollywood Buzz article, and even if that is accurate, we tend to not let advertising write our articles. Since you had moved the page, just a FYI on my reasoning. - 13:37, April 24, 2012 (UTC) :Works for me, I was almost ready to do it myself but was waiting for a second. If he actually did work on Trek, and there is some evidence of it, we can do it over and do it right. 31dot 13:41, April 24, 2012 (UTC) Archer4real Let’s get a few things clear. I don’t have a computer of my own and am limited to public resources; therefore I don’t always know when there have been new messages. Also the computer systems don’t always allow me to respond on talk pages, it “jams the system” or something, I don’t know. So we’re talking ability and awareness here. I’m going to continue not to categorise the articles I’m going to create because I don’t know how to or what the appropriate categories might be. As for fonts etc I’ll try to take better care. It’s disgusting you should threaten to block my access under these circumstances as I’ve done nothing wrong as such, and I’ve been working my balls off these last few weeks. I’m signing this this way for above reasons. Archer4real, 10.40a.m. :As I said, I do not wish to block you, but you seemed to be ignoring posts made on your page and it was the only way left I had to get your attention. If you are in the situation you say you are with computer access, I might indicate that on my user page or user talk page so others know that and will not expect a response immediately. :If you don't know how to categorize something, either technically or which category to put, then ask, either by talking to another user (as you did here) or by indicating that on the talk page of the article. If you have some sort of technical issue preventing you from using talk pages, then post such a message in the article itself, if necessary. It's one thing to be the occasional poster creating an article here or there and not having everything, but if you are going to create many articles, it is good for you to have as much of what is supposed to be there as possible. 31dot 09:59, May 18, 2012 (UTC) Why do you keep correcting the interquadratal warp drive page? In the show if you've actually watched the episode it's perfectly clear and safe to assume that Barclay makes up all of the terms based on his face and the looks that the others give him when he says it. He was making it up alright? Edit it to say that. :I would hardly describe one edit as "keep correcting" the page; however, I did so because saying "widely assumed" is unencyclopedic and would be like saying "some fans believe yada yada". The term is meaningless unless there is some citation as to who exactly is widely assuming. Further discussion should take place on the article's talk page. 31dot 23:18, June 1, 2012 (UTC) Defiant Thanks for stepping in there, though I wouldn't block him myself, especially after what happened last time. The particular problem here started as "disrupting MA to prove a point", and that covers actions for awhile now. I've let them slide since I couldn't be sure if they were intentional, simply born out of ignorance, or something else, but they have been increasing in "audacity" (for lack of a better word), so putting a firm stop to it now seems like the best course of action, considering, again, what happened last time. That said, there might be a better way to do this, but years of others trying them haven't seemed to stick. - 00:34, June 23, 2012 (UTC) Degra's shuttle/ship Hi. Could you please rename Degra's shuttle to Degra's ship? --Defiant 02:00, June 25, 2012 (UTC) :I might when I have time to change the links to it; I don't right now. 31dot 02:47, June 25, 2012 (UTC) Okay, no problem. I don't personally have the time, either, as I'm about to have a long sleep. Thanks a lot, though. :) --Defiant 03:01, June 25, 2012 (UTC) ::How do I go about proposing mergers for flop/flophouse, metacarpal/metacarpus or anything else if it comes to that? Daresay I can cut/paste/redirect etc, but presumably there’s a process for running things up the flagpole and seeing if the cat licks it up – i.e. gaining support or opposing POVs. Advice pls. Diolch yn fawr--Archer4real 09:52, June 25, 2012 (UTC) You may be interested in this article. --Defiant 11:48, June 25, 2012 (UTC) :I've seen those discussions- and like with Defiant's page, when I get time.... ;) 31dot 11:56, June 25, 2012 (UTC) Block request ::BTW, can you block this one user here? http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/97.89.156.66 Again, they gave vague/unsound reasons for editing it and then just posted this random garbage here. I went to their "profile" and it apparently isn't even created yet. Still, this guy smells of site hijacker: [znx =1/ by jeff.l.meadows'sr 270 stony forks rd weaverville nc /[usa ]] :Anon users don't get profiles; they have to register if they want one. I already posted a warning on their talk page, as the edit was not particularly obscene or vulgar, and seems to be a test edit. If they do the same thing again, then a block may be warranted. 31dot (talk) 15:46, June 26, 2012 (UTC) Trek Academy I am new to Memory-Alpha. Just posted page "TrekAcademy." You marked it for deletion. Not sure why. Have I violated any rules or regulations of this site? Please let me know and I will eidt the page with a retraction if you wish. Regards 04:54, July 13, 2012 (UTC) :You have already seen the talk page of your article; I suggested the pages for deletion on the grounds they were discussing. Please feel free to participate in the discussion on that page. 31dot (talk) 09:04, July 13, 2012 (UTC) Profile How come i can not put more than 3 pictures on my profile? 17:30, August 16, 2012 (UTC) :Sulfur answered you before I could. 31dot (talk) 01:33, August 17, 2012 (UTC) Citing photos I take? Quick question for you - I want to add an image of the replacement discs and associated literature which are coming with the TNG Season 1 Blu-ray correction packet, but I'm not quire sure how to list it after upload (category, copyright, etc) - do I just do it like the Cover Art image? http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/File:TNG_Season_1_Blu-ray_cover.jpg - [[User:Aatrek|'Aatrek']] 19:51, August 30, 2012 (UTC) :That's probably where I would start; I'm not completely sure, but that makes sense to me. :) I might ask Sulfur about it; he is probably more knowledgeable than I about this. 31dot (talk) 20:35, August 30, 2012 (UTC) ::If the image can in any way be attributed to you, as in the composition and arrangement of the material, you can credit yourself as the copyright (EG: File:Enterprise at the National Air and Space Museum.jpg) since the citation will mention what the image is and you can just add any categories manually, but if the image is of just one piece of material, I would copyright it as a cover using the standard template. - 20:48, August 30, 2012 (UTC) Cyberbullying 31dot - Please stop following me around the site reverting my edits and then leaving inane comments on my talk page. Not everyone has the same view of Star Trek. I noticed you do this to a lot of people who you disagree with. I consider your actions to be cyberbullying. :Er- I'm not really sure what you are referring to, as you must have been using a different IP or username that the one you posted here with; and reversions are a common wiki practice; if you or anyone disagrees with them, it should be discussed on the talk page. It is precisely the fact that "not everyone has the same view of Star Trek" that discussion should take place, not unfounded accusations. 31dot (talk) 17:54, September 17, 2012 (UTC)